Who Has The Superior CV?

[Goodnight, Irene]

Nothing to do with a head-to-head battle, but whose resume do you find more impressive --- Jack Dempsey's, or Joe Frazier's?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Frazier, but not by a ton. Dempsey's pre title run was solid. The Ali win, and even the losses, elevate him past Jack for me.

[gilgamesh]

I'd say Frazier had the better career overall also.

But Dempsey definitely is right at or near the top of the list when you're discussing most savage title victories in boxing history. His title win over Jess Willard was BRUTAL!!!! Jack will always be defined and remembered for that one.

[Crease]

Dempsey was dominant for a few years at HW, Frazier never was because he had Ali and Foreman with him.

But it is a close call, because Frazier had foughtthe better opposition.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Frazier was never dominant? You sure about that? There were questions during Ali's exile, but he sure looked dominant then and in MSG.

[Crease]

Frazier was never dominant? You sure about that? There were questions during Ali's exile, but he sure looked dominant then and in MSG.

And because of those questions that you have brought up, no-one could say for sure who the Number One was.

Although Frazier beat Ali in their 1st fight, Smokin' Joe'sreign didn't last that long for him to gain an aura of invincibility the same way that Dempsey did.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Joe didn't take 3 years off, but he most definitely was dominant. Leonard & Hearns were both dominant fighters leading up to their clash. I think you may have just used the wrong term. If not, I can't agree.

His aura of invincibility didn't last that long, but nobody thought he was going to lose to George foreman. The Big man was admittedly frightened. But an aura of invincibility shouldn't rate on a resume anyway.

[yancey]

Joe didn't take 3 years off, but he most definitely was dominant. Leonard & Hearns were both dominant fighters leading up to their clash. I think you may have just used the wrong term. If not, I can't agree.

His aura of invincibility didn't last that long, but nobody thought he was going to lose to George foreman. The Big man was admittedly frightened. But an aura of invincibility shouldn't rate on a resume anyway.

"nobody thought he was going to lose to George Foreman"

Count me as one of the Frazier fans who was very leery of him fighting Foreman in '73. Based on the Ron Stander fight, where he was slightly staggered early, but also on the fact that Frazier seemed more into his music than fighting + the significant punishment he took in the FOTC, I knew that Frazier had lost that eye of the tiger edge, which a fellow like him needed. I really wanted Frazier to retire after the FOTC, so did someone who knew a lot more, Yank Durham. Frazier had trouble finishing fellows like Daniels and Stander, the signs were there.

I still figured and was hoping he would get by Foreman somehow, but I knew damn well that Big George was very dangerous and was not surprised at all when the news came in from Jamaica. Not surprised, but pretty disappointed.

As far as the topic question, I would go with Frazier's record over Dempsey's, but not by much.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Joe didn't take 3 years off, but he most definitely was dominant. Leonard & Hearns were both dominant fighters leading up to their clash. I think you may have just used the wrong term. If not, I can't agree.

His aura of invincibility didn't last that long, but nobody thought he was going to lose to George foreman. The Big man was admittedly frightened. But an aura of invincibility shouldn't rate on a resume anyway.

"nobody thought he was going to lose to George Foreman"

Count me as one of the Frazier fans who was very leery of him fighting Foreman in '73. Based on the Ron Stander fight, where he was slightly staggered early, but also on the fact that Frazier seemed more into his music than fighting + the significant punishment he took in the FOTC, I knew that Frazier had lost that eye of the tiger edge, which a fellow like him needed. I really wanted Frazier to retire after the FOTC, so did someone who knew a lot more, Yank Durham. Frazier had trouble finishing fellows like Daniels and Stander, the signs were there.

I still figured and was hoping he would get by Foreman somehow, but I knew damn well that Big George was very dangerous and was not surprised at all when the news came in from Jamaica. Not surprised, but pretty disappointed.

As far as the topic question, I would go with Frazier's record over Dempsey's, but not by much.

Did not the manner of Foreman's victory at least surprise you, though? He simply smashed through his guard without a single ostensible challenge.

Also, which of Foreman's pre-title fights caused you concern?

[yancey]

Joe didn't take 3 years off, but he most definitely was dominant. Leonard & Hearns were both dominant fighters leading up to their clash. I think you may have just used the wrong term. If not, I can't agree.

His aura of invincibility didn't last that long, but nobody thought he was going to lose to George foreman. The Big man was admittedly frightened. But an aura of invincibility shouldn't rate on a resume anyway.

"nobody thought he was going to lose to George Foreman"

Count me as one of the Frazier fans who was very leery of him fighting Foreman in '73. Based on the Ron Stander fight, where he was slightly staggered early, but also on the fact that Frazier seemed more into his music than fighting + the significant punishment he took in the FOTC, I knew that Frazier had lost that eye of the tiger edge, which a fellow like him needed. I really wanted Frazier to retire after the FOTC, so did someone who knew a lot more, Yank Durham. Frazier had trouble finishing fellows like Daniels and Stander, the signs were there.

I still figured and was hoping he would get by Foreman somehow, but I knew damn well that Big George was very dangerous and was not surprised at all when the news came in from Jamaica. Not surprised, but pretty disappointed.

As far as the topic question, I would go with Frazier's record over Dempsey's, but not by much.

Did not the manner of Foreman's victory at least surprise you, though? He simply smashed through his guard without a single ostensible challenge.

Also, which of Foreman's pre-title fights caused you concern?

GI,

What kind of challenge can one make after receiving that right uppercut that GF delivered against JF causing that second knockdown? To me, that was one of the most hellacious punches I've ever seen and it was a testimony of JF's warrior spirit greatness that GF could not keep him down after that. But the fight was basically over and no challenge could be mounted after that knockdown, imo.

Before that devastating uppercut, Frazier's ability to mount a challenge was hampered greatly by the pushing-shoving tactics that Foreman was allowed to get away with. Frazier had to be able to get to the inside in order to mount a challenge and he simply couldn't. The fact that he was overweight is not so important as to his actual weight, but moreso as an indicator of the Frazier camp's pre-fight attitude. They under-estimated the danger that Foreman presented. But I know you don't want me to all cranked up about this stuff, do you? (sorry, just had to get it in one more time ) Your guy won.

As far as what scared me before the fight was the fact that I knew Frazier was going to be wading into some real power and had to be damned careful. The two knockdowns that JF took against a big, awkward, but strong guy like Bonavena plus the Ramos right uppercut that briefly buckled JF's knees always bothered me and I knew that JF was facing a somewhat similar style but with much greater potential and lethal force in big George.

I knew what GF could do as far back as the Mexico City Olympic final when he destroyed the Russian. I can't say I watched too many of GF's pre-title fights but I knew what he did against Chuvalo and just knew of the power that was there.




p.s. One other thought. In the 1972 time period, I would have bet fairly heavily that GF was a coming heavyweight champ. Not necessarily as early as 1/22/73, but a coming champ. In 1972, I was guessing that Frazier would be champ maybe another 18-24 months, hanging around for one more big money rematch with Ali. (which I would have guessed him to quite possibly lose by decision, because to me JF had lost his edge)

But to me, back in '72, other than Ali and Frazier, Foreman stood out above everybody else in the field as the coming force. I was right about that, but once he was champ, GF surprised me by falling apart so early. I figured him for a good five years of domination.

[Goodnight, Irene]

"nobody thought he was going to lose to George Foreman"

Count me as one of the Frazier fans who was very leery of him fighting Foreman in '73. Based on the Ron Stander fight, where he was slightly staggered early, but also on the fact that Frazier seemed more into his music than fighting + the significant punishment he took in the FOTC, I knew that Frazier had lost that eye of the tiger edge, which a fellow like him needed. I really wanted Frazier to retire after the FOTC, so did someone who knew a lot more, Yank Durham. Frazier had trouble finishing fellows like Daniels and Stander, the signs were there.

I still figured and was hoping he would get by Foreman somehow, but I knew damn well that Big George was very dangerous and was not surprised at all when the news came in from Jamaica. Not surprised, but pretty disappointed.

As far as the topic question, I would go with Frazier's record over Dempsey's, but not by much.

Did not the manner of Foreman's victory at least surprise you, though? He simply smashed through his guard without a single ostensible challenge.

Also, which of Foreman's pre-title fights caused you concern?

GI,

What kind of challenge can one make after receiving that right uppercut that GF delivered against JF causing that second knockdown? To me, that was one of the most hellacious punches I've ever seen and it was a testimony of JF's warrior spirit greatness that GF could not keep him down after that. But the fight was basically over and no challenge could be mounted after that knockdown, imo.

Before that devastating uppercut, Frazier's ability to mount a challenge was hampered greatly by the pushing-shoving tactics that Foreman was allowed to get away with. Frazier had to be able to get to the inside in order to mount a challenge and he simply couldn't. The fact that he was overweight is not so important as to his actual weight, but moreso as an indicator of the Frazier camp's pre-fight attitude. They under-estimated the danger that Foreman presented. But I know you don't want me to all cranked up about this stuff, do you? (sorry, just had to get it in one more time ) Your guy won.

As far as what scared me before the fight was the fact that I knew Frazier was going to be wading into some real power and had to be damned careful. The two knockdowns that JF took against a big, awkward, but strong guy like Bonavena plus the Ramos right uppercut that briefly buckled JF's knees always bothered me and I knew that JF was facing a somewhat similar style but with much greater potential and lethal force in big George.

I knew what GF could do as far back as the Mexico City Olympic final when he destroyed the Russian. I can't say I watched too many of GF's pre-title fights but I knew what he did against Chuvalo and just knew of the power that was there.




p.s. One other thought. In the 1972 time period, I would have bet fairly heavily that GF was a coming heavyweight champ. Not necessarily as early as 1/22/73, but a coming champ. In 1972, I was guessing that Frazier would be champ maybe another 18-24 months, hanging around for one more big money rematch with Ali. (which I would have guessed him to quite possibly lose by decision, because to me JF had lost his edge)

But to me, back in '72, other than Ali and Frazier, Foreman stood out above everybody else in the field as the coming force. I was right about that, but once he was champ, GF surprised me by falling apart so early. I figured him for a good five years of domination.

Thanks for that. I wasn't around for those fights, obviously, so appreciate the perspective of someone who was. I must admit, I did think, "Christ, here he goes again," when I started to read & the word, "pushing," appeared ( ), but I'm glad I read on. It was interesting